Surely China don't block the cgos server/port, in fact as far as I know, there is a test bot(BUPT) of BUPT(developed by other team of same lab of Yu Ping) which had played on cgos.
On 1/3/08, Peter Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > About my net lag, > > Don asked, "What do you do when you play on KGS?" > > When playing against humans, there is hardly ever a problem because > humans either resign quickly, pass normally, or quit the game (ugh!) - > humans don't notice the net lag. In the kgs computer tournaments, > it's still my bot that ends up resigning anyway ;( > > >From what you say Don, the server is already using slight Fisherish > rules - 5 min + .25 sec ? I like your idea of making it even more > Fisherish. I think it would help normalize the ratings in the > 1300-2000 bracket where my bots play, if it were increased to 5 min + > 1 sec, or 3-4 min + 2 sec, or something like that. It sounds like an > easy-enough change and one that doesn't seem to have bad side-effects. > > Thanks again for the great work in putting up the CGOS server & to all > the other programmers who put bots up there to play. > > Peter > > p.s. This is my network setup - ethernet from laptop to a tower on > the roof of my house. Parabolic Directional antenna wireless B, to an > intermediate tower 5km away receives it on a 180 degree nondirectional > antenna, sends it via directional antenna over wireless b to a > directional antenna at my ISP it-outlook another 5km away. From the > ISP I think there are several more wireless hops, eventually to > Manila, Philippines, then across some cable (I assume a cable). > > The real dog, as you can see, is the hop across the ocean, about 80% > of my ping time. I assume that from Japan they have shorter ping > because they have better infrastructure but I'd be curious to hear a > confirmation of that. I know that in China some technical > universities even have terrible networks (I was trying to get Yu Ping, > 7d chinese pro pursuing his masters in go programming, to put his java > bot on cgos but to the best of my knowledge I failed to get him to do > it. maybe china blocks the cgos port. don't try to read wikipedia > from china either, it's blocked along with anything else that has > certain unofficial accounts of supposed history.) > > 1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] tracepath 208.100.19.102 > ~ > 1: 192.168.1.51 (192.168.1.51) 0.242ms pmtu > 1500 > 1: 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) asymm 36 14.985ms > 2: 172.16.0.254 (172.16.0.254) 33.483ms > 3: router.it-outlook.noc (192.168.1.254) 27.493ms > 4: 222.127.77.143 (222.127.77.143) asymm 3 > 34.011ms pmtu 1452 > 5: 203.177.68.197 (203.177.68.197) 84.384ms > 6: 203.177.31.89 (203.177.31.89) 84.382ms > 7: 203.177.254.185 (203.177.254.185) 369.732ms > 8: POS3-1.IG4.LAX1.ALTER.NET (157.130.214.193) asymm 14 337.252ms > 9: 0.so-5-0-0.XL2.LAX1.ALTER.NET (152.63.112.254) asymm 12 342.739ms > 10: 0.so-5-0-0.XL2.CHI13.ALTER.NET (152.63.64.14) asymm 13 362.669ms > 11: POS7-0.GW1.CHI13.ALTER.NET (152.63.69.181) asymm 13 378.225ms > 12: wbsconnect-gw.customer.alter.net (65.207.236.126) asymm 19 378.225ms > 13: 61.216-86-149.static.steadfast.net (216.86.149.61) asymm 19 540.291ms > 14: vswitch3.steadfast.net (216.86.146.24) asymm 15 363.857ms > 15: boardspace.net (208.100.19.102) 378.845ms reached > Resume: pmtu 1452 hops 15 back 15 > > There is also about 15% packet loss (I think all in the first leg from > my house to the ISP) that depending on the protocol probably doesn't > make much difference because it's only a 30ms trip to get it resent. > > 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ping 208.100.19.102 > ~ > PING 208.100.19.102 (208.100.19.102) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=333 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=340 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=327 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=344 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=7 ttl=50 time=332 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=8 ttl=50 time=425 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=9 ttl=50 time=362 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=10 ttl=50 time=350 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=11 ttl=50 time=337 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=12 ttl=50 time=375 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=13 ttl=50 time=346 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=14 ttl=50 time=384 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=15 ttl=50 time=342 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=16 ttl=50 time=398 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=17 ttl=50 time=335 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=18 ttl=50 time=339 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=19 ttl=50 time=327 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=20 ttl=50 time=365 ms > 64 bytes from 208.100.19.102: icmp_seq=21 ttl=50 time=336 ms > > --- 208.100.19.102 ping statistics --- > 22 packets transmitted, 19 received, 13% packet loss, time 21134ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 327.380/352.887/425.192/25.698 ms > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
